IT WAS MID-SUMMER and Rhonda had gloves on.
"I have to wear gloves whenever I read," she explained. "The
problem is, I'm a librarian."

A librarian with multiple
chemical sensitivity; talk about a handicap.

"Newsprint is especially bad. The ink on the
paper gives me rashes. Even the smell of an open book sets me off gasping, in
hives, with a sore throat. And I can't wear gloves for the odors," she
added. "And then there's the air conditioning; the smell of the carpet
and cleaners; the water from the water fountain that I can't drink; foods in
the cafeteria that I can't eat; the unending weakness and fatigue; the
depression about it all. What can I do? Aside from live in a bubble, I
mean."

Rhonda, a prematurely gray woman in her forties,
had been unhappily coping for years. She did indeed wear gloves at work.
She'd probably have worn a respirator if they'd let her. She was a mess and,
of the very few doctors willing to consider her plight, none had helped her.

Multiple chemical sensitivity
probably affects millions of Americans, but the medical profession is not
doing any counting. MCS has been pretty much rejected as a legitimate
illness. That's because "It may be the only ailment in existence in
which the patient defines both the cause and the manifestations of his own
condition." (Gots RE. Multiple chemical
sensitivities: public policy [Editorial]. J ToxicolClinToxicol 1995;
33:111-3.)

Orthodox medicine generally regards people with
MCS as sensitive, all right: sensitive in their heads. The stress, anxiety
and depression that doctors equate with MCS may all be results of MCS.
Certainly Rhonda fit the description.

But this was not all in her head. It was in her
whole body. You had only to look at her, or listen, to appreciate her misery.
She was able to function, but only with the greatest of daily efforts.

It shouldn't have to be that hard. And, I do not
think it has to be. But then, I am not a physician.

So let's ask some.

At their website, the AmericanAcademy
of Family Physicians offers polite, lukewarm compassion, but essentially
regards MCS as a non-entity. (Multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome. Magill MK and Suruda A.
American Family Physician, Sept 1, 1998 http://www.aafp.org/afp/980901ap/magill.html
)

As evidence, the AAFP refers to statements such
this one by the American Medical Association in 1992:

"No evidence based on well-controlled
clinical trials is available that supports a cause-and-effect relationship
between exposure to very low levels of substances and the myriad symptoms
reported by clinical ecologists to result from such exposure."

The AmericanAcademy of Allergy and Immunology
made a similar statement in 1986, and the AmericanCollege of Physicians likewise in
1989.

But the American College of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine's 1993 statement must really irk MCS suffers:
"The science is indeterminate about MCS as a specific entity and the
cause and effect relationships have not been clearly established."

So, as you might expect, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency concluded, in 1996, that "There is at present no
medical consensus concerning the definition or nature of this disorder."

Interestingly enough, according to a 1995
statement by Sheila Bastien, Ph.D., a neuropsychologist who has served on the environmental
illness advisory panels for the State of California and the U.S. Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR):

"In
1988 workers of the EPA headquarters became ill when new carpets were
installed and other remodeling took place. Some of the employees developed
MCS. Some of these employees are still working at home, and many of them
still have MCS or continuing illness. Some have not been able to go back to
work." (http://www.california.com/~hawk/MCS-Ammunition.htm
)

You have to love the irony there, don't you?

Actually, the AmericanAcademy
of Family Physicians' website is probably the most supportive
"official" medical website an MCS sufferer will come across. For
instance, it lists some 30 common chemical exposures from air fresheners and
asphalt to tile cleaners and varnish, all of which may
"precipitate" MCS symptoms. But then, AAFP goes so far as to advise
alleged MCS sufferers to avoid "unproven therapies" including
"rotating diets" and "extreme avoidance of chemicals." In
my opinion, behind this one may sense unwritten industry-friendly assumptions
that chemicals are our friends, whether in your food or in your environment.

Does AAFP share mottoes with Alfred E. Newman?
Chemicals? What, we worry? "Don't worry; be happy" was a hit
popular song. Adorable. But "Strength through joy" was the motto of
the Nazis, the least environmentally conscious administration imaginable.

I do not think anxiety or depression causes MCS; MCS
may certainly cause anxiety or depression. Either way, I am quite certain
that "putting on a happy face" is not the cure.

Instead, I suggest that you look at ducks.

Ducks don't get wet. They don't, you know, even
though they wade and swim and dive in water. Sure, the duck's feathers will
feel wet to the touch. But that's not the real ducky part. The duck's skin
and body stays nice and dry. When they preen themselves, ducks keep their
feathers oiled, and the oily feathers trap a layer of insulating air between
them and the duck's skin. This also serves to keep the duck warm, even during
their extended swims in Titanic-temperature freezing waters that would kill
humans from hypothermia in a matter of minutes. Winter after winter, I've
watched pairs of Mallards happily paddling around in the
not-quite-completely-frozen waters of the Erie canal that flows near my home
in upstate New York.

The duck can't change its environment, so it
fortifies itself against it. Whether it is fur on a polar bear or blubber on
a walrus, animals are remarkably tolerant of their surroundings. I mean, what
choice have they?

In my opinion, people with
multiple chemical sensitivity have no practical choice, either.
Certainly, reducing environmental pollution and ones exposure to known
irritants has my complete support. But we live in a strikingly imperfect
world, not in a bubble, and that is the way it is likely to stay until we
make our governments change it. We, like ducks, do well when we strengthen
our personal defenses against a hostile environment.

I am no friend of the toxic chemical industry, as
those who have been following my involvement with the battle against the Diaz
Chemical Corporation will instantly bear witness to. (http://www.doctoryourself.com/diaz.html
; scroll down the page for the background information on this issue.
Incidentally, I was sued for libel by the chemical company; they dropped the
case as soon as it got to a judge. Then the U.S. Department of Justice, which
includes the FBI, went after them.)

But I digress.

My take on multiple chemical
sensitivity is, in essence, not of chemical isolation but of
nutritional insulation. Until we have cleaned up the world, you had better
toughen up your body. Here's a fast-working approach that is worth a fair
therapeutic trial: saturation of vitamin C.

At least that's what Rhonda did. She was in a
real hurry to feel better, and got to bowel-tolerance saturation in a day. In
fact, in a single morning. After taking nearly 50,000 mg of vitamin C in the
hours before noon, she left the library and went out for a lunchtime walk.
Saturation hit at that very moment. Into a nearby rest room . . .

Look, my job is to tell you what works. Why does
mega-C dosing work? Several reasons come to mind.

"The very moment I reached bowel tolerance
of vitamin C," Rhonda told me afterwards, "I had a rush of energy
and a huge upswing in my mood. It was as if I'd turned on a light in a dark
room. It was amazing, truly like night and day."

You should have heard her "new Rhonda"
voice. It was light and bubbly and filled with vitality. The woman was a
changed person. She had drive. She had confidence. Most of all, she had bare
hands.

AN IMPORTANT NOTE: This
page is not in any way offered as prescription, diagnosis nor treatment for
any disease, illness, infirmity or physical condition. Any form of
self-treatment or alternative health program necessarily must involve an
individual's acceptance of some risk, and no one should assume
otherwise. Persons needing medical care should obtain it from a
physician. Consult your doctor before making any health decision.

Neither the author nor the webmaster has
authorized the use of their names or the use of any material contained within
in connection with the sale, promotion or advertising of any product or
apparatus. Single-copy reproduction for individual, non-commercial use is
permitted providing no alterations of content are made, and credit is given.